Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Geckos Distributing Adhesion to Toes in Upside-down Running Offers Bioinspiration to Robots

  • Published:
Journal of Bionic Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Discoveries in geckos locomotion have advanced the bio-inspired robotics. However, the gecko-inspired robots still lag behind animals in attachments and maneuvers due to our failure to understand and implement gecko bionics thoroughly. Here, we studied the toe deployments that facilitate the upside-down motion of geckos by focusing on the directions and contact area of toes to offer inspirations for the design and control of feet of legged robots that must operate on inverted surfaces. Instead of clustering toes, geckos align toes in varying directions. They distribute adhesion to toes by controlling the magnitude of contact area, with one square millimeter setae generating ∼153.8 mN shear force and ∼39.5 mN attractive force on ceilings. Front feet deploy toes in a ∼190° span that centers on ∼16° from the motion direction. Toes distribute uniformly and contribute similarly. Whereas, hind feet deploy toes in a ∼220° span centering around ∼90° relative to the fore-aft direction. The last two toes point toward the rear and contribute most in hind feet while the first two toes adhere barely. Such deployments involving distributed control among toes not only provide insight into biological adhesion but will also deliver useful information to the next generation of climbing robotics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dickinson M H, Farley C T, Full R J, Koehl M A R, Kram R, Lehman S. How animals move: An integrative view. Science, 2000, 288, 100–106.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gao H, Wang X, Yao H, Gorb S N, Arzt E. Mechanics of hierarchical adhesion structures of geckos. Mechanics of Materials, 2005, 37, 275–285.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Autumn K, Gravish N. Gecko adhesion: Evolutionary nanotechnology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2008, 366, 1575–1590.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Autumn K, Puthoff J. Properties, principles, and parameters of the gecko adhesive system. In: Smith A M, ed., Biological adhesives, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2016, 245–280.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Russell A P, Stark A Y, Higham T E. The integrative biology of gecko adhesion: Historical review, current understanding, and grand challenges. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 2019, 59, 101–116.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chen J J, Peattie A M, Autumn K, Full R J. Differential leg function in a sprawled-posture quadrupedal trotter. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2006, 209, 249–259.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Autumn K, Hsieh S T, Dudek D M, Chen J, Chitaphan C, Full R J. Dynamics of geckos running vertically. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2006, 209, 260–272.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nam W, Seo T W, Kim B, Jeon D, Cho K, Kim J. Kinematic analysis and experimental verification on the locomotion of gecko. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2009, 6, 246–254.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Li Y, Krahn J, Menon C. Bioinspired dry adhesive materials and their application in robotics: A Review. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2016, 13, 181–199.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gorb S N, Varenberg M, Peressadko A, Tuma J. Biomimetic mushroom-shaped fibrillar adhesive microstructure. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2007, 4, 271–275.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Qu L T, Dai L M, Stone M, Xia Z H, Wang Z L. Carbon nanotube arrays with strong shear binding-on and easy normal lifting-off. Science, 2008, 322, 238–242.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Menon C, Sitti M. A biomimetic climbing robot based on the gecko. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2006, 3, 115–125.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Unver O, Uneri A, Aydemir A, Sitti M. Geckobot: A gecko inspired climbing robot using elastomer adhesives. Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Orlando, USA, 2006, 2329–2335.

  14. Daltorio K A, Gorb S N, Peressadko A, Horchler A D, Ritzmann R E, Quinn R D. A robot that climbs walls using micro-structured polymer feet. In: Tokhi M O, Virk G S, Hossain M A, eds., Climbing and Walking Robots, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2006, 131–138.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kim S, Spenko M, Trujillo S, Heyneman B, Santos D, Cutkoskly M R. Smooth vertical surface climbing with directional adhesion. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 2008, 24, 65–74.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Yang G, Bellingham J, Dupont P E, Fischer P, Floridi L, Full R J, Jacobstein N, Kumar V, McNutt M, Merrifield R, Nelson B J, Scassellati B, Taddeo M, Taylor R, Veloso M, Wang Z L, Wood R. The grand challenges of science robotics. Science Robotics, 2018, 3, eaar7650.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Higham T E, Russell A P, Niewiarowski P H, Wright A, Speck T. The ecomechanics of gecko adhesion: Natural surface topography, evolution, and biomimetics. Integrative and Comparative Biology, Tampa, USA, 2019, 59, 148–167.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hansen W R, Autumn K. Evidence for self-cleaning in gecko setae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2005, 102, 385–389.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hu S, Lopez S, Niewiarowski P H, Xia Z. Dynamic self-cleaning in gecko setae via digital hyperextension. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2012, 9, 2781–2790.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kim S, Cheung E, Sitti M. Wet self-cleaning of biologically inspired elastomer mushroom shaped microfibrillar adhesives. Langmuir, 2009, 25, 7196–7199.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mengüç Y, Röhrig M, Abusomwan U, Hölscher H, Sitti M. Staying sticky: Contact self-cleaning of gecko-inspired adhesives. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2014, 11, 20131205.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Alizadehyazdi V, Modabberifar M, Javid Mahmoudzadeh Akherat S M, Spenko M. Electrostatic self-cleaning gecko-like adhesives. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2018, 15, 20170714.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Alizadehyazdi V, Mcqueney E, Tanaka K, Spenko M. Ultrasonic and electrostatic self-cleaning microstructured adhesives for robotic grippers. 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Madrid, Spain, 2018.

  24. Vanhooydonck B, Andronescu A, Herrel A, Irschick D J. Effects of substrate structure on speed and acceleration capacity in climbing geckos. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2005, 85, 385–393.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Russell A P, Johnson M K. Real-world challenges to, and capabilities of, the gekkotan adhesive system: Contrasting the rough and the smooth. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 2007, 85, 1228–1238.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Stark A Y, Ohlemacher J, Knight A, Niewiarowski P H. Run don’t walk: Locomotor performance of geckos on wet substrates. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2015, 218, 2435–2441.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wang Z Y, Dai Z D, Ji A H, Ren L, Xing Q, Dai L M. Biomechanics of gecko locomotion: The patterns of reaction forces on inverted, vertical and horizontal substrates. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 2015, 10, 016019.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Chu B, Jung K, Han C S, Hong D. A survey of climbing robots: Locomotion and adhesion. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, 2010, 11, 633–647.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Russell A P, Bauer A M, Laroiya R. Morphological correlates of the secondarily symmetrical pes of gekkotan lizards. Journal of Zoology, 1997, 241, 767–790.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Naylor E R, Higham T E. Attachment beyond the adhesive system: The contribution of claws to gecko clinging and locomotion. Integrative and Comparative Biology, Tampa, USA, 2019, 59, 168–181.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zani P A. The comparative evolution of lizard claw and toe morphology and clinging performance. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 2000, 13, 316–325.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Birn-Jeffery A V, Higham T E. Geckos significantly alter foot orientation to facilitate adhesion during downhill locomotion. Biology Letters, 2014, 10, 20140456.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Russell A P, Oetelaar G S. Limb and digit orientation during vertical clinging in bibron’s gecko, chondrodactylus bibronii and its bearing on the adhesive capabilities of geckos. Acta Zoologica, 2016, 97, 345–360.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Autumn K, Dittmore A, Santos D, Spenko M, Cutkosky M. Frictional adhesion: A new angle on gecko attachment. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2006, 209, 3569–3579.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Z Y, Gu W H, Wu Q A, Ji A H, Dai Z D. Morphology and reaction force of toes of geckos freely moving on ceilings and walls. Science China Technological Sciences, 2010, 53, 1688–1693.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Pesika N, Tian Y, Zhao B, Rosenberg K, Zeng H, McGuiggan P, Autumn K, Israelachvili J N. Peel-zone model of tape peeling based on the gecko adhesive system. The Journal of Adhesion, 2007, 83, 383–401.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Dai Z D, Wang Z Y, Ji A H. Dynamics of gecko locomotion: A force-measuring array to measure 3d reaction forces. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2011, 214, 703–708.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Eason E V, Hawkes E W, Windheim M, Christensen D L, Libby T, Cutkosky M R. Stress distribution and contact area measurements of a gecko toe using a high-resolution tactile sensor. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 2015, 10, 016013.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Arzt E, Gorb S N, Spolenak R. From micro to nano contacts in biological attachment devices. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2003, 100, 10603–10606.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Varenberg M, Peressadko A, Gorb S N, Arzt E. Effect of real contact geometry on adhesion. Applied Physics Letters, 2006, 89, 121905.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ruibal R, Ernst V. The structure of the digital setae of lizards. Journal of Morphology, 1965, 117, 271–293.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Johnson K L, Kendall K, Roberts A D. Surface energy and the contact of elastic solids. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 1971, 324, 301–313.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Autumn K, Liang Y A, Hsieh S T, Zesch W, Chan W P, Kenny T W, Fearing R, Full R J. Adhesive force of a single gecko foot-hair. Nature, 2000, 405, 681–685.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kim S, Spenko M, Trujillo S, Heyneman B, Mattoli V, Cutkosky M R. Whole body adhesion: hierarchical, directional and distributed control of adhesive forces for a climbing robot. Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Roma, Italy, 2007, 1268–1273.

  45. Bhushan B, Peressadko A G, Kim T W. Adhesion analysis of two-level hierarchical morphology in natural attachment systems for “smart adhesion”. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, 2006, 20, 1475–1491.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Hawkes E W, Eason E V, Christensen D L, Cutkosky M R. Human climbing with efficiently scaled gecko-inspired dry adhesives. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2015, 12, 20140675.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Gorb S N. Attachment Devices of Insect Cuticle, 1st ed., Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Song Y, Dai Z D, Wang Z Y, Full R J. Role of multiple, adjustable toes in distributed control shown by sideways wall running in geckos. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Science, 2020, 287, 20200123.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work was sponsored by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 51435008 and 31601870) and an Educational Innovation Program (No. KYLX_16_0327). The reviewers are thanked for their helpful advice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, 210016, China

    Yi Song, Zhouyi Wang & Zhendong Dai

  2. College of Astronautics, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, 210016, China

    Xiaobo Lu & Jun Zhou

  3. Base of Gecko Breeding, Guangyuan Industry Co., Ltd, Yunnan Tin Group, Gejiu, 661000, China

    Zehua Zhang

Authors
  1. Yi Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiaobo Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jun Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhouyi Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zehua Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Zhendong Dai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhendong Dai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Song, Y., Lu, X., Zhou, J. et al. Geckos Distributing Adhesion to Toes in Upside-down Running Offers Bioinspiration to Robots. J Bionic Eng 17, 570–579 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-020-0045-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-020-0045-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation